Civil Liberties and Rights Flashcards
McCulloh v Maryland? What happened?
Congress proposed the second national bank of the U.S. in 1816, James Madison approved the charter, however, the states did not. MAryland started taxing the bank because it was on their soil, they refused, and Maryland sued McCulloch.
Why did the states disapprove of the (first and) second national bank?
- The national bank competed with their own
-There was no single currency in the U.S. at the time - - Didn’t like the bank managers (saw em’ corrupt)
-They felt the federal government was overstepping its bounds by making the states r=print more money than they could redeem. *
What were the constitutional questions of McCulloch V. Maryland
- Is the commission of a national bank within Congress’ powers implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause?
- Do states have the authority to tax a branch of national bank within its borders
What was holding McCulloch v Maryland
Unanimous decision that congress had the power to create a national bank, and Maryland’s taxation was unconstitutional.
Civil Liberties
fundamental rights that protect people from government infringement
- specifically unreasonable government restriction of your liberties
“protections Against government action”
What was the majority opinions’ reasoning for Mcculloch v Maryland
Chief Justice Marshall (ou marshall court) says that the
- Necessary and Proper Clause supports a national bank as an essential creation and addition to Congress’ ability to carry out their enumerated powers
- Although states have the concurrent power of taxation, they cannot tax the national bank because it is under federal law and according to the Supremacy Clause, the states cannot control it because it is supreme.
United States V. Lopez. what happened?
Alfonso Lopez Jr. brought a gun to sell at school, and he was charged by the state, state charges were dropped and he was federally charged with violating Free School Zones Act.
Lopez took his case all the qY to U.S. court of appeals (they agreed with him)
-the U.S. testified
Majority opinion and holding of U.S. V Lopez
The possession of guns is not economic activity that falls under the regulation in the commerce clause. (holding)
- The government’s explanation that guns= bad economy because business dont like crime, could mean that any activity was commercial and open for federal regulation, with nothing left to the states.
- 10th amendment creates a federal system which protects state power
Constitutional questions of US V Lopez,
Is the 1990 gun free school zones act unconstitutional?
Are activities within K-12 related to interstate commerce?
Civil Rights
government protections from discrimination as members of particular groups, such as minorities
“Protections provided by government action”
Before the Bill of Rights…
states had their own variations, which often lacked the fundamental rights included now
- such as freedom from religious persecution
- freedom from having religious qualifications to hold office
Bill of Rights
A 1-10 that are a list of fundamental rights and freedoms that individuals possess
Who originally wanted a Bill of Rights?
- Antifeds
- said that citizens need protection from the continuous growth of centralized power
- A.F raised public concern through Brutus propaganda, which brought about the list
How many B.O.R were originally proposed
- 10 were ratified
What was H___ argument about the B.O.R.
- Hamilton; They were unnecessary because people were sovereign under the constitution (also James Madison’ argument) // the government’s job were to secure individual rights
- B.O.R. was dangerous because the list would be incomplete either way. Those in power would deny rights not expressly put (not now though)
The first amendment gurantees that..
CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW.. restrictive of speech, assembly, petition, religion, and press.
Selective incorportation uses…
the 14th amendment “due process” clause to expand the protections within B.O.R. to also cover state laws and actions… on a case by case basis.
What are the two (important) clauses found in the first amendment
Establishment and Free Exercise
Wisconsin v Yoder background info
-The Amish wished to take their children out of the state’s education system after 8th grade, because of their belief system. Wisconsin law prohibits them from doing so.
Constitutional Question in Wisconsin v yoder
- does Wisconsin’s requirement of school til’ 16 violate the First Amendment’s free exercise clause by criminalizing parents who take their children out for religious reasons ?
Holding Wisconsin v yoder
7-2 decision; Free Exercise clause outweighs Wisconsin law, only in the case of an established religion